Former NDP Leader Tom Mulcair Writes That Elizabeth May Is A "Troll" (His Word)

A good thing then he never led such a party.

I find this thread by Mighty Middle to be very problematic on many levels. There is so much irony being exposed in this article by Tom Mulcair but Mighty Middle fixates instead on highlighting his perceived fixation of divisiveness between the NDP and the Green Party.  Mighty Middle engages in pro Liberal and anti-NDP " trolling" behaviour. This seems to be his only contribution to this board.

Here is what Might Middle had to skip over to redefine the entire message that this article highlights.

1. Justin Trudeau lied to our First Nations people about wanting to do things differently.

From Tom Mulcair's article, "Trudeau has over-promised and under-delivered on aboriginal issues and is facing a reckoning. He is the one who promised concrete results, like safe drinking water on every reserve, in his first mandate. He also pledged a nation-to-nation approach. He accomplished neither and, instead, has ignored successive decisions of the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal in favour of First Nations children."

So Mighty Middle extracted from that is that Mulcair said something about Elizabeth May missing the point about the role of the opposition.

2. The Supreme Court of Canada has ruled in favour of First Nations in land disputes.

Here is what Tom Mulcair actually writes, "There are not only political leaders, of course. Other institutions that are the backbone of our democracy also have leaders. The Supreme Court showed it again last week. Ruling in a case concerning the Innu First Nation, whose lands straddle the Quebec-Labrador border, Canada’s highest court stated that “it is not possible to describe Aboriginal rights in terms of traditional property law concepts” and that “the legal source of Aboriginal rights and title is not state recognition, but rather the realities of prior occupation, sovereignty and control.”

So if this is the case, then we have the Liberal government of Justin Trudeau not only taking First Nations children to court and denying them their court ordered compensation but the Liberal government is exposed with this article for deliberately disregarding the law again. 

3. Justin Trudeau actively excludes his own First Nation Liberal MP's voices in the saga.

We know very well how Justin Trudeau treated Jody Wilson Reybold. Justin Trudeau does have other First Nations, Métis, and Innu MP's at his disposal that he could use to help him negotiate. Yet Justin Trudeau is exposed by Tom Mulcair for doing the exact opposite of what he should be doing as Prime Minister of Canada.

Mulcair writes, "One of the biggest changes in political leadership in the past decade is the arrival of a contingent of strong First Nation, Metis and Inuit voices within Parliament itself. Romeo Saganash, the first Quebec Cree to graduate from law school, served two full terms before deciding not to run in the last election. His voice still resonates in Parliament where, in 2018, he fired off a heartfelt rebuff to Trudeau whom, he said, didn’t give a f— about Indigenous rights. He was talking about the Trans Mountain pipeline but his words apply equally here.

Dan Vandal is Canada’s very capable Minister of Northern Affairs, he is also Metis, fluently bilingual and, oh yeah, one of the greatest Canadian boxers of his generation. He could have been given a key role on the front lines. He has not been heard from since the start of the crisis. Trudeau doesn’t even include him when he publishes lists of ministers managing the issues.

Instead, two upper-crust Trudeau loyalists, Carolyn Bennett from Toronto and Marc Miller from Montreal, have been the faces of the government."

4. Key opposition party leaders and hopefuls are deliberately missing the point.

So Mulcair has exposed the Liberal government of their record of violating the law to deliberately mistreat First Nations people. First Nations people have the law on their side. The government is breaking the law. We therefore have an opposition whose job it is to hold the Liberal government accountable. It is not just Elizabeth May who Mulcair is critical of. Here is what Mulcair had to say about Peter McKay.

"Peter MacKay is probably the only politician in Canada who can ensure Justin Trudeau’s re-election. It was amazing to watch him “Tweet and retreat” over vigilante-like behaviour in Edmonton. A former Crown prosecutor and attorney general applauding guys in pickup trucks taking the law into their own hands? And he wants to lead this country?"

We really need to ask Mighty Middle how he can misread the entire message of an article in order to create an entirely different picture from what was really intended. If Mighty Middle doesn't like it when a former NDP national party leader and former Leader of the Oppisition uses the word troll, then Mighty Middle must learn to stop acting like a dirty Liberal troll by misleading people about what newspaper articles are really about.

Pondering wrote:

If anyone is an opportunistic troll it is Mulcair. Does he ever have anything negative to say about the Conservatives? 

From Tom Mulcair's article:

"Peter MacKay is probably the only politician in Canada who can ensure Justin Trudeau’s re-election. It was amazing to watch him “Tweet and retreat” over vigilante-like behaviour in Edmonton. A former Crown prosecutor and attorney general applauding guys in pickup trucks taking the law into their own hands? And he wants to lead this country?"

Also bear in mind that Tom Mulcair has been working for the Toronto Sun for less than one year. The government in power is not the Conservative party but the Justin Trudeau Liberal party. It is understandable, then, that Tom Mulcair  would focus more time and energy on the governing party than on the opposition party.

Also remember that Tom Mulcair was the Leader of the Opposition prior to the 1915 general election which saw the Liberal party jump from third place to form government. While Mulcair was the Leader of the Opposition he did an outstanding job of holding the Conservstive government to account. He was arguably the best Leader of the Opposition that we have witnessed within my lifetime anyway. He could even rank as one of the best in our nation's history.

Tom Mulcair was criticized internally for being too right wing for the NDP but he was never ever criticized for slacking off on his attacks of the Conservative government. In fact, some wish that we had his talent and skill level back in the opposition leadership role at this time.

But, Liberal lovers would take issue with Justin Trudeau being criticized for blatently disregarding the laws of the land when it comes to his treatment of First Nations people.

What a pile of revisionist history

Mulcair did an outstanding job in the House it was the election campaign where he went off the rails

NorthReport wrote:

What a pile of revisionist history Mulcair did an outstanding job in the House it was the election campaign where he went off the rails

There was no valid reason for Mulcair to obsess about the irrelevant Duffy sideshow.   How is it even news that a senator would be moderately corrupt.

I never bought the conspiracy theories about Mulcair and still do not. He is a New Democrat who showed poor judgement despite phenomenal debating skills. His poor judgment is from time to time dressed up into a conspiracy theory.

Mulcair has a histroy of at times being aggressive and at other times seeming to think that certain priorities or messages should be downplayed in order to get elected. I do not think he is a right winger in disguise -- rather it appears that he lacked confidence in the electability of some NDP positions. I do not htink he likes  either Liberals or Conservatives or is one in disguise, I think this is a smear based on moments where he lacked courage to stare down these parties on issues that are important to the NDP. Mulcair has always been of the persuasion that you can only do something with power and you make the minimum compromises to get that power. Had he won then people would have loved it. However, he compromised, made other mistakes and still lost and canno be forgiven for that.

I am okay with people blaming his judgment or criticizing his positions or communications. I think it is unreasonable here to take these compromises as betrayal and smear him when they are very likely misjudgments that he thought were compromises that could allow the NDP to take power and deliver on at least some things.

Unlike many others here, including some New Democrats, I think Canada would ahve been a better place had he won in 2015. The nager should be over his failure to win through misjudgment more than assumptions without evidence about his motives.

Now that he has been attacked by all and driven from the party, I do not beleive that he owes anyone anything. I actually have seen much of what he has said and written and believe that this is what he beleives is the truth. In some cases the hard truth the NDP needs to hear. I do not beleive there is evidence that he intends to be disloyal or cause the party harm, I think in his mind his apparent disloyalty was always something he believed the party needed to hear and would be better for it.

No we cannot get in his mind and know  exactly what he is or was thinking. However, we can at least acknolwedge that he has shown judgment in the past we disagree with and there is at least a possibility that ther eis nothing wrong with his intentions and he is just doing what he believes is best. In a number of ways he is actually not yet proven wrong either while in some others it appears as if he has been.

So in the light of this, he ws the leader. He has been removed. We have criticized his actions. I do not believe that, without enough evidence, we can question his intentions. Those that want to smear him here. I ask that you advance some real evidence that this is based on intent rather than judgment and even perhaps some understandable anger at some of the comments around his ouster. These comments that were widespread, I think release him from many of the loyalties an ex-leader would be expected to have. What he is doing now is acting as a thoughtful media pundet, honestly doing the job he is paid to do after being fired from his last job. I do not htink he is shilling for anyone but he does not owe anyone anything. I think he continues to advocate for things in the way he thinks can work and our disagreements with him amount more to matters of judgment than conviction.

Misfit wrote:

But, Liberal lovers would take issue with Justin Trudeau being criticized for blatently disregarding the laws of the land when it comes to his treatment of First Nations people.

Trolling again (rolling my eyes).  Trudeau is a dud, a failure, an emperor with no clothes, an empty suit. Is there anything else you need me to confirm? 

Mulcair was against the legalization of cannabis and in favor of Energy East. He has continued to beat the drum of balanced budgets as the priority because the economy is doing well. I think Mulcair is a kind, intelligent and accomplished traditionalist man. I do not see a progressive in Mulcair just because some of his positions have been progressive. 

I typed with my cell phone. The word "has" should have been "had". No clue where India came from either.

 

(Self-delete.  Dupe post).

What conspiracy? Mulcair within the past months has promoted the idea that budgets should be balanced when the economy is doing well like now and that running deficits is bad. It's like he never heard of GDP vs deficit. 

As NDP leader he went down to the states and pumped up Energy East as a replacement for Keystone XL.

Instead of saying straight out that barring girls from wearing sports hijabs was wrong he suggested a letter should be written to the international soccer organization to get their opinion on it. He was against Cannabis legalization and went the reefer madness route. 

I'm not saying he doesn't hold any progressive positions but he was never an appropriate leader for the NDP. The Liberals should never have been able to flank him on the left. 

Mighty Middle wrote:

Ken Burch wrote:

He didn't have to put the Duffy thing ahead of issues that actually affect the voters.  Minor corruption is really only an issue the privileged care about.  It has nothing to do with the needs of the working and kept-from-working poor, FN people, immigrants, or much of anybody outside of the wealthy elitists on CBC panel shows.

The Conservatives fell in the same trap - thinking that SNC would be the death of the Trudeau government - and endlessly kept trying to keep the issue alive. If there is one thing I saw from voters being interviewed about the 2019 election is that voters felt no party was talking policy. There were too many personal attacks. Okay we know about SNC, but where is the platform? Where are the kitchen table issues you should be talking about.

Yes Mulcair should have brought up the Duffy scandal in the house, but there were WEEKS (yes 5 days in a row) where NO NDP MP asked any questions in the house, it was all Mulcair asking ALL the NDP questions. All on Duffy and forcing Harper to answer every single question like he was on trial.

Great, but the questions all about Duffy were to the exclusion of all the other issues of the day.

The worst part is, the voters never cared about the Duffy thing and they never cared about balancing the freaking budget.  Nor were the voters insisting that the NDP refuse to support the Quebec students or Idle No More.

And quite frankly, the voters pretty much assume that everybody in the Senate is corrupt.

Why was he so obsessed with that one issue?  Why did he keep yammering on about Duffy when doing so kept the NDP in third place for most of his tenure as leader, and when the issue that temporarily moved the NDP into the lead in the summer of 2015 was Mulcair's willingness to finally talk about something ELSE, when he made the only courageous stand on principle of his entire leadership in opposing C-51?

Let me see here...

Tom Mulcair wrote a scathing article where he poignantly exposed the racist and hypocritical intent of the Liberal government to break the law in order to force the pipline through unceded territory. He exposed both Green and Conservative opposition MPs for running a gong show. And a Liberal troll reduced this subject matter down  to criticism of one word for the purposes of attacking the NDP. Then, NDP supporters ate the bait and turned this thread into an attack on Tom Mulcair who isn't the leader of the NDP anymore.

Can we please stop taking the bait on trash threads like this? Either discuss the article in question on its substance or open another thread on Mulcair destroying the NDP.

Mighty Middle wrote:

Misfit wrote:

Let me see here...

The racist and hypocritical intent of the BC NDP GOVERNMENT to break the law in order to force the pipline through inceded territory.

Misfit I fixed it for you

MIGHTY MIDDLE DOES NOT KNOW HOW TO READ!!!

MIGHTY MIDDLE DIRECTLY REFERENCED AN ARTICLE CRITICIZING THE TRUDEAU LIBERAL GOVERNMENT!!!

NOT THE FUCKING BC NDP!!'

No, Canada IS broken. We obviously learned nothing from Oka.

Misfit wrote:

Mighty Middle wrote:

Misfit wrote:

Let me see here...

The racist and hypocritical intent of the BC NDP GOVERNMENT to break the law in order to force the pipline through inceded territory.

Misfit I fixed it for you

MIGHTY MIDDLE DOES NOT KNOW HOW TO READ!!!

MIGHTY MIDDLE DIRECTLY REFERENCED AN ARTICLE CRITICIZING THE TRUDEAU LIBERAL GOVERNMENT!!!

NOT THE FUCKING BC NDP!!'

Not to mention that on resource extraction, the BC NDP is supported by the right-wing BC Liberals, whose 2013 victory Trudeau hailed as a victory for the middle class.